It can only be my assumption the "good?" doctor is selling his TR (thankyou
for leaving us) to buy a Porsche to match his attitude. I can neither
confirm nor counter claims on the list he is an amateur Proctologist. These
are perhaps wild rumors. To his defense, perhaps he is from New Jersey.
Rx:
So Doc, bestow somebody your car that is so rare and let the rest of us be.
This is neither the forum nor a platform to engage in spitting contests.
Please take two Preparation-H , some breath drops and call the Porsche mail
list next month.
Thank you.
At 07:26 PM 10/10/97 -0400, Craig Richburg wrote:
>Craig Richburg wrote:
>
>Can I call you Robert?
>This has been interesting. Got 7 (seven) responses and two (or to)
>offers for the TR6. Looks like you put your ass in your mouth again (If
>it could be done) Lets do this. Figure out what is the incorrect
>grammar in this message, while I prepare to show my car tonight to
>common folk.
>
>
>
>Bob Danielson wrote:
>>
>> Ah.......Doc..... the correct grammar is too good..... also think
>> you've killed any chance of selling to this list.... maybe you should
>> try the Bargain News..... oh damn, they're full of common folk too..
>> or is it to or maybe two??
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Craig Richburg <richburg@bellatlantic.net>
>> To: Bob Danielson <rdaniels@snet.net>
>> Cc: Triumphs@autox.team.net <Triumphs@autox.team.net>
>> Date: Friday, October 10, 1997 2:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: Another Show Car (65 TR4) FOR SALE
>>
>> >Dr. Richburg wrote:
>> >
>> >Hello again Bob.
>> >
>> >No, I disagree with you when you say that "the car is to good for the
>> >"common folk." However it is to good for folks like you. If that is
>> >common, well....you get the picture.
>> >
>> >Craig Richburg
>> >
>> >Bob Danielson wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This is getting good..... especially in view of the fact that I
>> emailed this
>> >> guy a few weeks ago asking for infor about his cars and got a
>> rather snooty
>> >> reply.... maybe his cars are too good for the common folks!
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Chris Lillja <Chris_Lillja@Pupress.Princeton.Edu>
>> >> To: Craig Richburg <richburg@bellatlantic.net>
>> >> Cc: Triumphs@autox.team.net <Triumphs@autox.team.net>
>> >> Date: Friday, October 10, 1997 11:17 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: Another Show Car (65 TR4) FOR SALE
>> >>
>> >> Dr. Richburg --
>> >>
>> >> The point is -- that lame attempts to "market" what is probably a
>> >> perfectly nice TR4, to people who love Triumphs anyway -- make it
>> >> look suspect in the eyes of the very people who might buy it.
>> >>
>> >> So my history book sez the final TR4 was built on Jan 6, 1965 and
>> >> had the commission number CT40304. With 250 made in calender year
>> >> 1965, that would make the first "1965" TR4 CT40054. Yes -- they
>> >> should be in sequence and there are no gaps reported in this
>> >> period...
>> >>
>> >> Now the question at hand is does the commission number of this
>> >> car fall in this sequence CT40054 - CT40304? If not it is merely a
>> >> 1964 (or earlier) that wasn't bought and titled until 1965.
>> >>
>> >> So what's that Comm. # doc?
>> >>
>> >> It's pretty academic considering there should be no difference
>> >> between a car produced on Dec. 31 (say CT40053) and Jan. 2....
>> >>
>> >> "Still ride in triumph over all mischance..." - Shakespeare
>> >>
>> >> Chris Lillja
>> >> TR4A
>> >> Norton Commando
>> >> Spit MKIV
>> >
>
>
|